a rose by any other name, or film...

I think out of all the films we have watched last week, “Rose Hobart” was honestly the only one which interested me. The film required an intense concentration which, for me, remained mostly unrewarded (but what else is new?). I understand that this film was created by splicing together clips from the actress’s earlier feature film, but having been unaware of this fact before, I watched the film feeling as though Rose Hobart was acting specifically for this film. I find it amazing the way her emotions still translate to the audience without the larger context of the original source of footage; it sort of reinforces the idea of cinema serving as a “universal language”. Admittedly, I was struggling with all sorts of theories circling the film’s plot, wondering why the scenes seemed to jump back and forth through time. At one point I wondered if Rose Hobart was actually playing two completely different characters. I was drawn into this film, wondering why the actress kept arguing with so many men, and whether or not she was planning a murder, for some scenes struck me as particularly sinister. And why the recurring image of the pebble dropping into the pool of water? The scene is beautifully captured in slow motion, and always juxtaposed with some image of nature, such as of swirling clouds in the sky, or the eruption of a volcano. I feel as though there is some deeper meaning to this motif, and to the entire film in general, which I am missing completely.